Literature DB >> 16569148

Category dimensionality and feature knowledge: when more features are learned as easily as fewer.

Aaron B Hoffman1, Gregory L Murphy1.   

Abstract

Three experiments compared the learning of lower-dimensional family resemblance categories (4 dimensions) with the learning of higher-dimensional ones (8 dimensions). Category-learning models incorporating error-driven learning, hypothesis testing, or limited capacity attention predict that additional dimensions should either increase learning difficulty or decrease learning of individual features. Contrary to these predictions, the experiments showed no slower learning of high-dimensional categories; instead, subjects learned more features from high-dimensional categories than from low-dimensional categories. This result obtained both in standard learning with feedback and in noncontingent, observational learning. These results show that rather than interfering with learning, categories with more dimensions cause individuals to learn more. The authors contrast the learning of family resemblance categories with learning in classical conditioning and probability learning paradigms, in which competition among features is well documented.

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16569148      PMCID: PMC1456066          DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.32.3.301

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn        ISSN: 0278-7393            Impact factor:   3.051


  23 in total

1.  ALCOVE: an exemplar-based connectionist model of category learning.

Authors:  J K Kruschke
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1992-01       Impact factor: 8.934

2.  Family resemblance, conceptual cohesiveness, and category construction.

Authors:  D L Medin; W D Wattenmaker; S E Hampson
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  1987-04       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Rule-plus-exception model of classification learning.

Authors:  R M Nosofsky; T J Palmeri; S C McKinley
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 8.934

4.  Objects, parts, and categories.

Authors:  B Tversky; K Hemenway
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  1984-06

5.  Choice, similarity, and the context theory of classification.

Authors:  R M Nosofsky
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1984-01       Impact factor: 3.051

6.  Rules and exemplars in category learning.

Authors:  M A Erickson; J K Kruschke
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  1998-06

7.  A neuropsychological theory of multiple systems in category learning.

Authors:  F G Ashby; L A Alfonso-Reese; A U Turken; E M Waldron
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 8.934

8.  Models of the effects of prior knowledge on category learning.

Authors:  E Heit
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1994-11       Impact factor: 3.051

9.  Base-rate effects in multidimensional perceptual categorization.

Authors:  W T Maddox
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 3.051

10.  From conditioning to category learning: an adaptive network model.

Authors:  M A Gluck; G H Bower
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  1988-09
View more
  7 in total

1.  Blocking in category learning.

Authors:  Lewis Bott; Aaron B Hoffman; Gregory L Murphy
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2007-11

2.  Prior knowledge enhances the category dimensionality effect.

Authors:  Aaron B Hoffman; Harlan D Harris; Gregory L Murphy
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2008-03

3.  Do salient features overshadow learning of other features in category learning?

Authors:  Gregory L Murphy; Joseph E Dunsmoor
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Learn Cogn       Date:  2017-05-04       Impact factor: 2.478

Review 4.  Categorization = decision making + generalization.

Authors:  Carol A Seger; Erik J Peterson
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2013-03-30       Impact factor: 8.989

5.  Observation versus classification in supervised category learning.

Authors:  Kimery R Levering; Kenneth J Kurtz
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2015-02

6.  Extending the Implicit Association Test (IAT): assessing consumer attitudes based on multi-dimensional implicit associations.

Authors:  Valentin Gattol; Maria Sääksjärvi; Claus-Christian Carbon
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-01-05       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Ensemble stacking rockburst prediction model based on Yeo-Johnson, K-means SMOTE, and optimal rockburst feature dimension determination.

Authors:  Lijun Sun; Nanyan Hu; Yicheng Ye; Wenkan Tan; Menglong Wu; Xianhua Wang; Zhaoyun Huang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-09-12       Impact factor: 4.996

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.